• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.

Are you satisfied enough with the Artificer to publish it?

Are you satisfied enough with the Artificer to publish it?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 18.9%
  • Almost, just needs a couple of minor changes

    Votes: 37 50.0%
  • No, it's it needs major changes

    Votes: 9 12.2%
  • No, it needs to be rebuilt from scratch

    Votes: 14 18.9%

  • Total voters
    74

DEFCON 1

Hero
In all seriousness, I actually do not care if/when they publish it, as I believe KibbleTasty's Alternate Artificer (currently on v1.7) already is a better version than what WotC has continued on with and it is all I will ever want or need in an Artificer. The seven subclasses it has for it cover conceivable archetype I might ever want, and my Eberron campaigns have already benefited from its existence.

Unless your only option is playing Adventurer's League and thus HAVE to use the WotC version... I don't know why anyone would go with theirs over KibbleTasty's.
 

Blue

Orcus on a bad day
I haven't gone over the changes in detail, specifically the new subclasses but also looking for other changes since February. The XGtE spells was a good add. I think they updated the Infusion list which is somethign I wanted, but I need to compare.

I still don't like the turrets from the Artillerist. They don't scale, becoming less important than a cantrip. They are in that in-between place of using an action to summon, so I can't look at them as just a damage boost like Hex or Hunter's Mark, but a bonus action to use, so I shouldn't expect them to do scaled cantrip damage. Though the temp HP one seems quite nice. Add in a paladin with auras and the team can turtle up well.

The change for multiclassing rounding of half-casters is one that was discussed her in geenral a few months back, and I started against it but was convinced I was wrong - all rounding up does is keep it on par with normal casting in almost every case, vs. being a big hit to the half- and third-casters much of the time. So I'm for it and would love to see that become official errata.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
Its not bad, mechanically speaking.
The main chassis is well done and the modularity is interesting.
But...I dont think the archetypes are a good fit for the fiction people are envisioning when building an artificer. On some of them, the ''pet'' seems forced and on some others, its like they wanted to put too many things in a single archetype.

I think some the ''pet'' features should be Innovations restricted to certain archetypes, just like some Warlock Invocations are restricted by Pact
 

Raunalyn

Explorer
No, I don't. I don't like it. What role does it fill? What does it add to the core group of classes that isn't already covered by those classes?

My personal opinion, mind you...but it doesn't seem to fit well.
 

Mercule

Explorer
Somewhere between "major changes" and "rebuilt from scratch". Mechanically, I don't think it's unbalanced. Flavor-wise, it's an abomination. Way too much "science" in my magic. What's up with the clockwork turrets? Those are gross.

I came up with a basic axiom for the Artificer. If it's the way a Son of Ether (from Mage: the Ascension) would do it, it doesn't belong on the artificer. No steampunk. No gears. No pets (except for a single "golem master" sub-class). The abilities should feel like the character is enchanting things, not using improbable pseudo-science. Magic as science, not magic with science.
 

Raunalyn

Explorer
Somewhere between "major changes" and "rebuilt from scratch". Mechanically, I don't think it's unbalanced. Flavor-wise, it's an abomination. Way too much "science" in my magic. What's up with the clockwork turrets? Those are gross.

I came up with a basic axiom for the Artificer. If it's the way a Son of Ether (from Mage: the Ascension) would do it, it doesn't belong on the artificer. No steampunk. No gears. No pets (except for a single "golem master" sub-class). The abilities should feel like the character is enchanting things, not using improbable pseudo-science. Magic as science, not magic with science.
This! This is my exact problem with it!
 

SkidAce

Adventurer
I see your point [MENTION=5100]Mercule[/MENTION] , and respect it.

For us/my campaigns, WIZARDS fill the role of magic as science (study, learn, have academies, specializations, etc ,etc.) with their learned and studious approach.

Sorcerers (adepts) ARE/CHANNEL magic.

Artificers? They run the gambit from magic craftsman/creators, to well, scienceny steampunk and new semi tech inventions. (bombs, guns, clockwork, you know the drill)

IMHO.

/end tangent
 

SkidAce

Adventurer
On a more on topic point, all we need IS a solid framework, and we can flavor it into our campaigns as we see fit.

Like we theoretically do with everything in the DM's toolkit.

(ex. My orcs are neanderthal klingons called brutemen.)
 

akr71

Explorer
Given that I have no intention of running an Eberron campaign, sure go ahead and publish it. If one of my players wanted to play one, I'd give it a green light, and if there was a perceived problem, we'd house-rule it at the time.
 

Psyzhran2357

Villager
I like it.

Battle Smith is definitely overtuned, and the other subclasses have a bit of an identity crisis over whether they want to be weapon attackers or cantrip slingers. Other than that I think what we have right now is solid, with no major revamps needed.
 

MonkeezOnFire

Explorer
I really like. I'm not a fan of Eberron so I started out pretty indifferent to the Artificer class but the latest version's Battlesmith class has me excited for it. I think a couple tweaks are in order with level 7 being pretty empty and the huge range on the Archivist's invulnerable scout. But overall I'd say it's a great addition to the game.
 

Mercule

Explorer
For us/my campaigns, WIZARDS fill the role of magic as science (study, learn, have academies, specializations, etc ,etc.) with their learned and studious approach.

Sorcerers (adepts) ARE/CHANNEL magic.

Artificers? They run the gambit from magic craftsman/creators, to well, scienceny steampunk and new semi tech inventions. (bombs, guns, clockwork, you know the drill)
Hmm... Using your breakdown, I guess this makes more sense:
Sorcerers: Are magic (no disagreement, here)

Wizards: Magic as science. I think we're good, here.

Artificers: Magic as engineering or magic as craft. It's still magic, though, and should look as much like modern (or even enlightenment) engineering as wizards look like modern science.

I think that last is part of the key. I'm not looking for camp, steampunk, etc. I'm more than willing to include the logical extension of industrialized/engineered magic. It should still be cut from the same cloth as the rest of the magic in the game, though. This artificer isn't. It tries to add both the role of the magical engineer and the theme of weird science. I only want one of those.
 

tglassy

Explorer
My main issue with the Artilarist is the turret not scaling well, like the other combat "Pets" do. I like the subclass otherwise, though I suppose you'd have to use the Turret for something other than "an extra attack". Seems like it is more of a support role, like putting it up to cause distractions while you escape or whatnot. Set it in front of a door and let it keep out the bad guys. With 5 times lvl, it's fairly robust as you lvl up. And even then, if the baddies charge it and start getting close to killing it you can just blow the turret.

However, it can climb, so if you have time to get your turrets into position, then they can lay down some fire on a single enemy with the Force Balista, act as crowd control with the Flame thrower, or grant endless temporary hit points to the group. And once you hit lvl 14, they grant half cover, which the rules don't say can't be used for Melee, the attacker just has to be on the other side of the field. Couple that with Temp HP every round and a second turret with the flamethrower, and a smaller party could take on a swarm of enemies without much difficulty. Add in a Paladin for the Saves, and you've got a powerful group, right there.

The damage kind of scales, in that you can have two turrets at lvl 14. and can use one bonus action to activate both. That's not nothing, though, as the Force Balista pushes creatures back 5 feet, so in a group, being able to both attack and push 2 creatures into different places is actually pretty dope, especially for breaking grapples or allowing a disengage without causing opportunity attacks. And you can move the turrets around at the same time. Give the Artificer a Thorn Whip (which I imagine as a grappling gun), and you can move three enemies around the room every round.

I've changed my mind. The utility of the turrets being a "ranged pet" having crowd control, single enemy movement and being a source of Temp HP is pretty awesome. It gets even more so when at lvl 14 it essentially functions as a party wide +2 to AC and Dex saves, and you get a second Ranged Pet, which adds just that much more utility. Keep the party pumped with temp hp while laying down fire on the crowd, or double up Force Balistas for fairly effective crowd control or BBEG suppression. All of which simply uses a Bonus Action.
 

Advertisement

Top